Assisted Suicide in the Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights

The Impact of the European Court of Human Rights on the Case Law of Constitutional Courts

Abstract

In its judgment in the Karsai case, published on 13 June 2024, the ECtHR acknowledged that a trend towards the decriminalization of assisted suicide is emerging, as access to physician-assisted suicide has been granted in certain European countries over the past few years. In Italy, Germany, and Austria, this decision stemmed explicitly from rulings by the constitutional courts. In contrast, in the majority of Council of Europe member states — including Hungary and Romania — assisted suicide is criminally punishable. Therefore, according to the ECtHR, the member states have a wide margin of appreciation in legalizing or criminalizing assisted suicide. In my study — based on the judgment in the Karsai case — I examine how the ECtHR has interpreted the conflicting fundamental rights, Article 2 of the ECHR (right to life) and Article 8 (right to respect for private life), as this represents a minimum standard for all member states. In presenting the decisions of the Italian, German, Austrian, and Hungarian constitutional courts on assisted suicide, I examine the framework for balancing fundamental rights under national constitutions, as well as the impact the ECtHR has on constitutional court practice. Although the Romanian Constitutional Court has not issued a ruling on assisted suicide, the Romanian Constitution guarantees, on the one hand, the right to life and to physical and mental integrity (Article 22) and, on the other hand, the right to privacy, specifically mentioning
the right to self-determination (Article 26); therefore, the interpretation of these fundamental rights can serve as a lesson for legal practitioners in Romania as well.